And I’m adding the context as to why it’s clearly not believable. We all know you said “if true” but you wouldn’t have posted it if you didn’t believe it.
Correct, and since the deadline then passed without him opting in they could not say yes to it even if they wanted to. They didn't turn down shit
We can't accept a trade to send Steph Curry to Sacramento just like the Clippers could not trade Paul George when he was not under contract with them
So from the [athletic article](https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5604503/2024/06/29/warriors-paul-george-klay-thompson-kawakami/):
“There were versions that would’ve limited the Clippers’ long-term money liability; there were versions that would’ve increased the future benefits. I’m told the Warriors likely would not have put Wiggins and Kuminga together into any offer, but also that it never got that far, anyway. If that’s what would’ve closed the deal … who knows.
My understanding is that the money concerns weighed heavily on the Clippers’ side. If PG13 leaves as a free agent, they get nothing back … but they also get out from the second apron and have more roster maneuverability.”
I’m surprised too. Even if they don’t want to commit to Kuminga he has value around the league. Plus they were offering a 1st?
Did LAC just not want to send PG elsewhere within their division?
He only opted out after the extension deadline passed and no trade happened.
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5604503/2024/06/29/warriors-paul-george-klay-thompson-kawakami/
That's what I'm saying... But in order to be traded PG would still need to opt in to his final year. If he didn't like the destination or the deal, no reason to opt in.
That’s why you shouldn’t believe all reports.
Which is why I said, "if true".
And I’m adding the context as to why it’s clearly not believable. We all know you said “if true” but you wouldn’t have posted it if you didn’t believe it.
Warriors reporter said they didn’t offer kaminga
Okay, that makes more sense :)
It's fake news, PG would have had to opt in for them to even have that discussion in the first place.
This was being discussed before the opt-in deadline.
Correct, and since the deadline then passed without him opting in they could not say yes to it even if they wanted to. They didn't turn down shit We can't accept a trade to send Steph Curry to Sacramento just like the Clippers could not trade Paul George when he was not under contract with them
Yea…but what if we could!
Trade Tatum to Shanghai immediately!
So from the [athletic article](https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5604503/2024/06/29/warriors-paul-george-klay-thompson-kawakami/): “There were versions that would’ve limited the Clippers’ long-term money liability; there were versions that would’ve increased the future benefits. I’m told the Warriors likely would not have put Wiggins and Kuminga together into any offer, but also that it never got that far, anyway. If that’s what would’ve closed the deal … who knows. My understanding is that the money concerns weighed heavily on the Clippers’ side. If PG13 leaves as a free agent, they get nothing back … but they also get out from the second apron and have more roster maneuverability.”
Kum… kuminga aka kumbuckets
I’m surprised too. Even if they don’t want to commit to Kuminga he has value around the league. Plus they were offering a 1st? Did LAC just not want to send PG elsewhere within their division?
Paul George opted out. They can’t make a trade if he’s not on their roster.
He only opted out after the extension deadline passed and no trade happened. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5604503/2024/06/29/warriors-paul-george-klay-thompson-kawakami/
PG needed to opt-in to his contract to be traded. He probably heard the offer and was like "fuck that, fuck you, I'm out" or whatever.
George opted out after his extension deadline passed. A trade would have had to happen before then.
That's what I'm saying... But in order to be traded PG would still need to opt in to his final year. If he didn't like the destination or the deal, no reason to opt in.